Memory Alpha:Files for deletion
TheDoctor.jpg ; Image:TheDoctor.jpg * One of the versions should be removed, they are identical. -- Florian - [[ :Florian K|'' ]] 18:18, 10 Mar 2005 (GMT) **Where's the second version? -- Cid Highwind 11:26, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC) ***is this cleared up ('keep')? -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 16:54, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) Image:LilyCochrane.jpg ; Image:LilyCochrane.jpg * .. better image of Lily at Image:Lily Sloane.jpg. Ottens 14:50, 26 May 2005 (UTC) * Does this image still have value at describing the events of the attack that are not shown in the other image? -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk ** I recommend '''keeping' this and using it in the ST:FC summary. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk Magazine illustrations ;Image:Starfleetunif2160s.gif * delete - a photoshopped version of a ST Magazine or Fact Files illustration, -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk ;Image:Starfleetunif2150s.gif * delete scan of a ST Mag illus. - I'd prefer for MA to use original illustrations or episodic caps, for copyright reasons. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk Poorly named/quality images ;Image:Blokeinadress.jpg * poor quality, incorrect naming format. --Gvsualan 09:21, 30 May 2005 (UTC) * are there any other images of the male-skant uniform being kept? possibly as a better quality replacement? -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk ;Image:Muse082.jpg *very small, poorly named. --Gvsualan 09:21, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ;Image:Fed prometheus.jpg * Extremely old, small and unused image. --Gvsualan 03:10, 31 May 2005 (UTC) ;Image:Fed springfield.jpg *Hooooooooorible quality, uncited image. --Gvsualan 03:10, 31 May 2005 (UTC) ;Image:Fed starbase3.jpg *We already have this image as (Image:JupiterStation.jpg), which is bigger, better quality, and is cited. Seems to be the same perspective though. -AJHalliwell 03:14, 31 May 2005 (UTC) ** Deleted --Gvsualan 12:00, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) ;Image:Councilll2.jpg * Name does not represent image. Image placement not accurate: Devna was not an Orion slave girl, just a girl who liked to dance. Since there is nothing else very revealing about the capture, and since there is already an image of Devna on her page and the Orion page, this image, therefore seems irrelevant. --Gvsualan 06:15, 31 May 2005 (UTC) ** delete -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk ** Deleted --Gvsualan 12:00, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) Several OLD unused images ;Image:First Battle of Chin'toka 3.jpg *last modified 31 Aug 2004. --Gvsualan 09:21, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ;Image:TerranEmpire.gif *last modified 11 Oct 2004 --Gvsualan 09:21, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ;Image:Klingonalphabet.GIF *Unused, over 6 months old. --Gvsualan 09:21, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ;Image:Andorianscript5.GIF *Unused, over 6 months old. --Gvsualan 09:21, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ;Image:Tos-tricorders.jpg *Unused, over 6 months old. --Gvsualan 09:21, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ;Image:Yridianscript2.JPG *Unused, over 6 months old. --Gvsualan 09:21, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ;Image:Romulantext.GIF *Unused, over 6 months old. --Gvsualan 09:21, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ;Image:Malonscript.JPG *last modified 1 Jan 2005. --Gvsualan 09:21, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ;Image:Allied_fleet_opens_fire.JPG * last modified 3 Jan 2005. --Gvsualan 09:21, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ;Image:Logo Kris earth hirogen.gif * Unused, approaching 6 months old. --Gvsualan 09:21, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ;Image:Logo Kris earth hirogen2.gif * Unused, approaching 6 months old. --Gvsualan 09:21, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ;Image:Logo Kris Borg.gif * Unused, approaching 6 months old. --Gvsualan 09:21, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ;Image:United Federation of Planets logo.png.png * Unused, approaching 6 months old. --Gvsualan 09:21, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ;Image:Cardassian symbol.jpg * Unused, approaching 6 months old. --Gvsualan 09:21, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ;Image:A_Federation_and_Klingon_fleet.jpg *Unused, mediocre quality. --Gvsualan 09:21, 30 May 2005 (UTC) :Delete All AmdrBoltz 01:16, 31 May 2005 (UTC) ::Deleted--Gvsualan 01:41, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC) Image:Deltans.jpg ;Image:Deltans.jpg *this is an image of Ilia used to represent the Deltans. It seems better to just place the image of Illia placed on her page placed on the Deltan page as well to reduce the need of this image. --Gvsualan 06:15, 31 May 2005 (UTC) * That would be Ilia ;-) and I certainly agree. Having the Deltans.jpg image seems just unnecessary. Ottens 21:11, 31 May 2005 (UTC) **'Deleted' --Gvsualan 06:07, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) Image:Dulmur and Lucsly.JPG ;Image:Dulmur and Lucsly.JPG *There are two images of these guys in the image list. this and Image:Dulmur and Lucsly.jpg (formerly Image:Dulmur and Lucsly in Sisko's office.jpg). The second image is much higher quality. --Gvsualan 06:15, 31 May 2005 (UTC) Image:TMP 8.jpg ;Image:TMP 8.jpg *'Replaced' by Image:Walk to V\'Ger.jpg. Smaller and better named. Ottens 20:44, 31 May 2005 (UTC) **I'm not so sure -- could we have a version without a "/" in the filename? -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 22:26, 31 May 2005 (UTC) ***It automatically did that so I guess that was the intention... Ottens 18:34, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC) *Agreed to delete. I renamed and deleted Image:Walk to V\'Ger.jpg so that it now is Image:Walk_to_Vger.jpg. --Gvsualan 01:57, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC) **'Deleted' --Gvsualan 06:07, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) Image:NX mess hall.jpg ;Image:NX mess hall.jpg * Better version without watermark at Image:Malcolm and Travis play chess.jpg. Ottens 18:34, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC) * delete --Gvsualan 06:07, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) ** deleted --Gvsualan 09:59, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC) Lirpa 01.jpg ; Image:Lirpa 01.jpg * uncited and of HORRIBLE quality. --Gvsualan 06:46, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC) * delete -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk Image:Valaraukar.jpg ;Image:Valaraukar.jpg * personal image, recommended for deletion last year August (per User talk:Valaraukar), but never addressed. --Gvsualan 21:53, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC) ** deleted -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk Image:Worf2379.gif ;Image:Worf2379.gif *hangover shot? Not the best picture, would be better if replaced with a nice headshot. --Gvsualan 06:25, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC) * Agreed. A better shot can be uploaded over this one. Ottens 10:05, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC) **Actually, I think we can remove the image altogether. We already have an image of Worf four years younger, and one that shows him in the alternate future of All Good Things, so I doubt this image is necessary at all. Ottens 13:43, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) * delete -- SmokeDetector47 // ''talk'' 18:19, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) Image:Geordi La Forge and Guinan (2379).jpg ;Image:Geordi La Forge and Guinan (2379).jpg *Image is not necessary. Ottens 12:19, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC) *'delete' --Gvsualan 06:07, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) Image:Worf and Guinan (2367).jpg ;Image:Worf and Guinan (2367).jpg *Image is unnecessary, as there already is an image showing Guinan and Worf. The latter is also used on the Prune juice page, so therefore this version is nominated for deletion. Ottens 20:24, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC) * delete --Gvsualan 06:07, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) Unused Argo shuttlecraft related images ;Image:Argobuggyemergencylanding.jpg, Image:Argobuggyalternativestorage.jpg, Image:Argobuggylookslikefun.jpg, Image:Argobuggyremoteandconsole.jpg, Image:Argobuggywheellock.jpg, Image:Argolaunch.jpg, Image:Argobuggystorage.jpg. *They appear to have once been incorporated into Argo (shuttlecraft), however they are not all that great, and far exceed the number of images acceptable on a page (currently there are three Argo pics remaining on the page). These, which were long ago removed, still remain unused. --Gvsualan 07:17, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) ** delete all. -- SmokeDetector47 // ''talk'' 18:19, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) Image:Guinan (1893).jpg ;Image:Guinan (1893).jpg *I uploaded the image, but not consider it unnecessary, as we already have the image Image:Guinan and Data (1893).jpg, which can be used on not only the Guinan page, but also on the Time's Arrow, Part I and Data pages. Ottens 13:51, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) ** self-nominations are candidates for speedy deletion, deleted -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 17:08, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) Image:DataBeard.jpg ;Image:DataBeard.jpg *Working on the Data page, it occurred to me this image is totally unnecessary. There is practically no reference to Data growing a beard in the article, and such an insignificant detail does not need an image. After all, there were barely two minutes alltogether which showed Data with his beard. Ottens 16:08, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) * Ah yes, but the article is incomplete. At the moment I vote neutral. The fact of why he did it - all part of being a student of the humanities is a topic that can be well discussed in his article (not necessary about growing a beard, but as an example of one of the many things). As well, it does go well with explaining what he, as an android, is capable of doing with is body, as was discussed with Bashir in "Birthright". --Gvsualan 19:42, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) ** Seeking to reduce the number of images on the Data page ;) I found Data's growing of a beard unimportant enough for an image. That, plus I don't think it could be used on any other page (the beard was rather insignificant in the episode as well)... Ottens 15:05, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC) * Has there been enough information to justify an article about beards ("Cause and Effect", "Q Who?", etc.) in reference to Star Trek? keep, some fans keep track of that sort of thing -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk **An article about beards would be interesting... but we need to ask ourselves... is it important for the casual fan need to know what Data looked like with a beard? -- SmokeDetector47 // ''talk'' 18:19, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) * Re: Mike - There is also the refence to Riker shaving off his beard in Insurrection and the whole "smooth as an androids butt" joke. As well, there could be something mentioned about Siskos new look, in the little Ben/Jake/goatee interaction, from "Explorers". There might be enough to make a beard fetish page. ;) --Gvsualan 10:52, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) Image:Picard and Data (2379).jpg ;Image:Picard and Data (2379).jpg *Currently this image is linked to emergency transport unit. The emergency transport unit does not even appear in the image, in fact, all that appears is Picard dematerializing, which is nothing new. If the point of the image is to show the emergency transport unit, certainly a screencap of Data slapping it onto Picard where you can clearly see what it looks like would be a better. Otherwise the images value of Data and Picard together is negligible, and a better image of the two in 2379 might be the two sharing a glass of champagne in Picard's ready room. --Gvsualan 19:42, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) *I'm currently working on the Data page where the image will be used. I think Data saving Picard and therewith sacrificing his own life is a moment important enough to deserve an image? Ottens 20:00, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) *'keeep' for summary also, but remove from incorrect context on transport unit page -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk ::Well, for now it's the best image on it... As soon as there's a better image on the transport unit, it can be replaced on its page, but as I pointed out I think the image is important enough for the Data page. Ottens 22:04, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) Image:Enterprisenx01purple.jpg ;Image:Enterprisenx01purple.jpg * there already several images featuring the foreward view of the NX-01, how is the inclusion of this one any more significant? --Gvsualan 19:46, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) *I thought it would be a good picture for the "Doctor's Orders" episode summary page, because it showed the Enterprise in the purple disturbance cloud. zsingaya 07:40, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC) * I'd say delete this image -- i still think there's value in an image showing the "look" of that particular subspace disturbance -- both for a technical article linked about subspace or for the episode summary -- but this image does both poorly. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk * I think that if we want to focus on the phenomenon -- then that is what should be the prominent feature of the article, not the images background. For example, there is an image of the Enterprise-E sickbay, however, 4 of the main characters are in the foreground blocking 60% of what you can see of the sickbay. I think the same applies here, as this image features Enterprise more than the phenomenon in question. --Gvsualan 10:52, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) Image:Back to the Future.jpg ;Image:Back to the Future.jpg *If there is going to be an image of Christopher Lloyd on his actor page, should it not be a headshot? Besides, an image from another (non-Trek) movie appearance of his seems somewhat inappropriate on a Star Trek website. --Gvsualan 10:19, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC) *By all means Gvsualan. If we can whip up a fair use head shot for that page let's go for it. I just used... or loaded up in a pinch... the same pic wikipedia used for their Lloyd profile page. I'm not going to run over to GIS and role the dice on copyrights looking for the perfect headshot.--BC19 19:50, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC) **I'm not sure what the root of your cinicism is, but an excellent "fair use, in a pinch" headshot might be one of, say, Lloyd's Star Trek character. --Gvsualan 20:31, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC) ***Just in case, I wasn't trying to criticize you if that's where you thought my cynicism was coming from. I simply explained why I posted up that picture you found inappropriate at the Lloyd page. The solution was obvious as you pointed out (as I switched it before you even mentioned this solution), but I thought heck... between Lloyd in full makeup for ST:3 or a white wig (?) for BTF I'd go with the pic with less makeup for the Lloyd page. I was wrong in thinking you could use a pic that wasn't Star Trek (Star Trek related) or a pub photo. My apologies. --BC19 20:40, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC) ****This topic was address tho not realy concluded at Talk:Velociraptor. Tyrant 20:45, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)Tyrant *'delete' -- the fact that Lloyd appeared on Star Trek makes him relevant to Trek -- the fact that he appeared in Back to the Future is not relevant to Star Trek. We need to keep that boundary in mind when choosing a photo -- we want to illustrate the man, not another (unrelated to this reference) appearance he made -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk ;Image:Velociraptor.jpg * delete or replace It might not be appropriate to include an image from another production like Jurassic Park. A more "fair use" image if one is needed for reference purposes here? -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk Image:A Galaxy class ship in 2371.JPG ;Image:A Galaxy class ship in 2371.JPG * ...seems unnecessary. It was placed on the Star Trek: Generations page, but in reality, shows nothing of importance - i.e. no interactions or special backgrounds. Basically it is just a forward view of a Galaxy class, which is essentially what Image:Enterprise-d.jpg shows. --Gvsualan 02:28, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) *That's true so I wouldn't lose sleep if it goes... I don't know. It looks a little more dynamic for lack of a better term. Isn't that original pick from the late 80's during TNG's early run? 2371 is a refurbished and revamped model from the '94 Generations film. It's a extremely small difference admittedly, but still. the pic is shown at an angle we rarely saw on the show (I've watched my Generations Special Edition DVD supplements too much, heh)--BC19 02:42, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) *'Comment' on the image itself. I'm not going to place stock in whether it should stay or not; but if it does, it definitely needs to be appropriately cropped. — THOR 04:20, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) *'Keep'. This may sound a bit weird, but the ship looks slightly different in the movie than on TV. It has much more contrast, and appears to have more detaile. Jaz 04:23, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) **Cropping is a given, that only takes 10 seconds to do. But, overall, one needs to address the usefulness. How many images of the same ship from how many different angles do we neccessarily need? I mentioned that other image as a possible alternate to replace the image with, otherwise we really don't need all of the redundancies. I won't object if we can find a good home for it, but right now, the way I see it, there are only two places for it, Galaxy class or USS Enterprise-D. If this is the case, then something has to be removed or replaced to keep the extra image of the same ship at a similar angle around in the image archives. --Gvsualan 04:31, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) *We already have an image of the Enterprise-D as it appeared on "These Are the Voyages", besides several other images of Galaxy-class starships. I vote to delete this unnecessary image. Ottens 09:42, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) *'Keep' Image:Enterprise-d.jpg is a publicity shot, while this is actually appeared on screen. Excelsior 10:59, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) **So what? Many images used for characters are publicity shots, for the reason these images are high quality (examples: Data, Picard, Riker, Beverly). We already have three frontal shots (1, 2 and 3) of the Enterprise-D, one aft view (1) from These Are the Voyages. Besides, we have several images of the Enterprise-D and other Galaxy-class starships, all showing significant things like saucer-seperation or the vessel during battle. This image adds nothing significant. Ottens 11:07, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) :I'd like to bring up a point about the necessity of some variant 1701-D/Galaxy-class images -- there were actually several Galaxy models used over the course of TNG, its spinoffs, and films. * The 6-foot 1701-D model - it was also painted "robin's egg blue" in color, noted by Andrew Probert, ** This model was painted specially to reflect some of its shooting lights better in its first appearance in "Encounter at Farpoint". This appearance was shot by ILM, but footage of this paintjob was used throughout TNG's seven seasons. ** For the restof season 1 and 2, this model was used, but without the paintjob being reflectively lit. (I'm not sure, this might have been at Image G or another effects company. IT was at this time this model was also used as the USS Yamato) ** This model was only brought out of retirement for saucr sep or closeup shots, until Generations when it was repainted to its original specs and was filmed by original effects firm ILM. (This is the model in Image:A Galaxy class ship in 2371.JPG) * The 4-foot Enterprise-D model was built around TNG season 3 and 4. It was smaller and easier to film, but had more surface detail. The configuration of the defector dish is shaped slightly different. (Image:Enterprise-d.jpg is a studio publicity photo of this model). The color was made a more standard gray. **This model was used for the rest of "The Next Generation", shots of the 1701-D docked at DS9, and also for the USS Odyssey and possibly USS Venture. From the same mold, copies of it were made as replicas and backup models. **This includes the future "All Good Things..." modification, and some of the "Exploding Galaxy" shots created for "Cause and Effect". The "All Good Things" 1701-D was modified back to regular arrangement to become the aforementioned ships at DS9, but with extra weapons emplacements left in place. * A CGI 1701-D was created for Generations ** this model was reused on Deep Space 9, but sometimes had different color schemes in CGI rendering. ** The CGI was used in Voyager also as USS Challenger ** A detailed CGI was used in the Enterprise finale. I intend to create some notes in articles about these modifications and variants, but i think it would be illustrative to have an image of each model. Providing each one was also used in a summary and on other technical pages like the Galaxy class article, would it be acceptable to keep at least one example of each Enterprise or Galaxy class modification. This probably means 6 images or so, each of which would be useful on more than two pages -- some of them, many more, for the single shots that were meant to represent two or more different ships. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 12:45, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) :There are a few brief bits about this subject here, including an image of all three 1701-D miniatures side-by-side. Just for reference, the six-footer was probably never relabeled with the Yamato registry or name; all appearances of the Yamato were reuses of stock footage of the 1701-D. Also, the image in question actually represents the CGI model created for Generations and reused for DS9 and VOY, and not the refurbished six-footer. The structure of the deflector dish is different and the new details on the lifeboats have disappeared. Sadly, the refurbished D was used in a precious few shots during Generations. :Regarding the image itself, I'm voting delete for now... the Enterprise-D page is getting somewhat crowded with images in that area and if we do want to have an image showing a CGI Galaxy, there are several available at USS Galaxy, USS Challenger, and (perhaps unnecessarily) at USS Venture. -- SmokeDetector47 // ''talk'' 18:19, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) :::The scene of the Yamato exploding wasn't stock footage, and the saucer was labeled with its registry, but i believe they used a pyrotechnic model. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 12:19, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) Image:Archer-tpol-tatv-2.jpg ;An image of Archer and T'Pol * that doesn't show a lot and has watermarks. It was kept because "It was the last shot of Enterprise", according to Ottens. However, the real last shot of Enterprise has now been added to the episode page of that series' finale. --Defiant | ''Talk'' 15:25, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) * keep - the second to last shot seems important to me also for some reason -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk ** remove watermark, though. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk * We do have another shot from the same scene Image:Archer-tpol-tatv.jpg, and, personally, it seems to carry a bit of weight, if any is to be carried. --Gvsualan 12:00, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) * How exactly is this shot, showing the backs of Archer and T'Pol important? It's their backs, for goodness sake!!! What important information does that add to the page that's not already there? --Defiant | ''Talk'' 16:21, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) * Although we already have Image:Archer-tpol-tatv.jpg, I think this image -- with watermark removal -- is much nicer than Image:Archer-tpol-tatv.jpg. Ottens 16:23, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) *Whether you like it or not, Memory Alpha is an encyclopedia, not an image gallery. It focuses more on information than pictures, and even images should be informative. This image needs to go! --Defiant | ''Talk'' 10:06, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) Image:Ilon tandro.jpeg ;Image:Ilon tandro.jpeg * There was a mix-up in the images regarding Enina and Ilon Trandro, I got it all straightened out but named this wrong (it was supposed to replace a Image:Ilon tandro.jpg, not .jpeg) Delete -AJHalliwell 16:11, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) ** eligible for speedy deletion, deleted -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk Image:Runabout (Enterprise-D)2.jpg ;Image:Runabout (Enterprise-D)2.jpg * Discussed on Ten Forward as superflous, as it agreeably uses unnecessary space and shows nothing new that cannot be seen in Image:Runabout (Enterprise-D)1.jpg. --Gvsualan 10:52, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) Image:ZeframCochrane2063-1.jpg ;Image:ZeframCochrane2063-1.jpg Uploaded to replace earlier version, but unnecessary since we already have Image:ZeframCochrane2063-2.jpg at the Zefram Cochrane page. Ottens 13:20, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) Image:Data and spot.jpg ;Image:Data and spot.jpg. Replaced with better quality Image:Spot.jpg. Ottens 13:37, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) Image:Wesley Crusher and Guinan (2365).jpg ;Image:Wesley Crusher and Guinan (2365).jpg. Considering the relationship between Wesley Crusher and Guinan is not that important, I don't think this is really necessary... Ottens 14:10, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) Image:Shanesweet.jpg ;Image:Shanesweet.jpg, We already have the better quality Image:Charles Tucker 17.jpg. Ottens 14:37, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) Image:Adamtaylorgordon.jpg ;Image:Adamtaylorgordon.jpg. We already have the better quality Image:Charles Tucker 8.jpg. The latter, however, has a watermark, but at least one of the two can be removed. Ottens 14:37, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) * Replace, I actually prefer the former to the latter. Lighter, a more head-on shot, and already w/o the watermark. — THOR 15:07, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) Image:Odyssey cruising.jpg Image:Odyssey cruising.jpg I'm not sure that this is the Odyssey or that the image is from DS9: "The Jem'Hadar." Excelsior 15:58, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) It's really low quality, and we already have an image of the Odyssey being destroyed... Ottens 16:04, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) Image:Guinan.jpg ;Image:Guinan.jpg We already have another head-shot of Guinan. Two are not necessary (per talk page), and the latter is almost half the size of the image nominated for deletion. Ottens 18:01, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) Image:Riker2379.jpg ;Image:Riker2379.jpg We already have Image:CmdrRiker2379.jpg. Both images are screencaps from Nemesis, the only exception being the one nominated for deletion shows him with four rank pips instead of three. Ottens 18:21, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)